Online misconduct, it says, is “the use of electronic communication to inflict harm. Examples include, but are not limited to: harassment, bullying, hazing, stalking, discrimination, retaliation, or any other types of misconduct that undermine dignity and respect.”

The Army’s efforts are admirable, but it remains to be seen whether the changes can be fairly implemented without the appearance of selective enforcement — or how the new efforts to “monitor” social media will be viewed among privacy and liberty advocates. Notably, the Army aimed its sights not at just those who misbehave online, but also those who don’t misbehave but somehow “condone” such action [emphasis added]: Read more

A series of locally produced public affairs articles by the DoD have tried to encourage troops to use ‘better judgment’ when it comes to social media — following a spate of ‘scandals’ in which US troops have brought less than positive attention to the military. One was an old photo of an Airman ‘kissing’ a POW/MIA painting; another, an Airman who flaunted avoiding saluting during retreat. Others have included irreverent photos of training for Honor Guard details — which included the sensitive images of flag-draped caskets.

The articles have taken the same general, and generally unhelpful, tone: ‘Please be careful’ — but offering little else in terms of specific guidance. In fact, the authors — generally young military Public Affairs officers — often venture into the untenable. Quoting a local Med Group First Sergeant, one said:

Before posting something, think, ‘Would my base commander approve of this post if it made it onto [a television channel]?’

The brackets probably originally said “CNN,” as a First Sergeant Read more

There are regulatory restrictions on what members of the US military are allowed to say and do when it comes to politics. With that in mind, there have been interesting displays from people in the US military (or claiming to be) over the proposed strikes on Syria.

For example, who would have thought a Soldier would publicly say this [emphasis added]:

“As a soldier, I understand that before any military action, our nation must have a clear tactical objective, a realistic strategy, the necessary resources to execute that strategy — including the support of the American people — and an exit plan. The proposed military action against Syria fails to meet any of these criteria.”

In the middle of the ongoing discussion about US military troops and their use of social media comes an interesting piece at the Marine Corps Times, where former military JAGs make the case that the Marines may not be able to police troops’ use of certain websites, despite their implication they may try to do so.

The impetus behind the discussion are generally certain Facebook pages that were denigrating toward female Marines. Said General James Amos, Commandant of the Marine Corps:

In a May 29 letter to Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Calif., Gen. Jim Amos denounced Facebook pages and other social media Read more

The court threw out Parker’s conviction for one of the two murders and reassessed his sentence for the other crime. The decision continues a trend of military death sentences being overturned on appeal — 11 out of 16 death sentences since 1984. The last military execution occurred in 1961.

If you’re a member of the US military and you’ve ever Facebook “Liked” President Barack Obama or Governor Mitt Romney, you’d better pay attention, because the Department of Defense just issued guidance that restricts that very thing.

An [active duty] Service member may generally express his or her own personal views on public issues or political candidates via social media platforms, such as Facebook, Twitter, or personal Blogs, much the same as they would be permitted to write a letter to the editor of a newspaper.

But, if you are “reasonably identifiable” as a member of the military, Read more